Atheist zealots a heavy cross to bear

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by terrazoids

I'm not here to give you advice. You know what I think... (or do you..)

I'm not sure I know what you think. I gather you're Christian, and probably Protestant because relatively few Catholics get into these kinds of debates; they're less prone to saying "read the book" as if that were a convincing argument.

You claimed that an understanding of a god was possible by reading a particular book. That part, I agree with. You implied that this understanding would include the concept of a "god of love." That part, I don't agree with. The more I've read of that book, the less love I see.

I would like to know which parts *of the book* convince you that this is a god of love, and how you decided to ignore the parts that mention his wrath, jealousy, hatred, and tendency to inflict armies and plagues on people who get in his way.

[terrazoids]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I AM talking about history. and as trite as it sounds, the fact that history does indeed repeat itself. I am attempting to point out to you that his path has been walked before (with slightly different results). how can you possibly rant about a "one true god" that has been copied and re-imagined, re-named and reworked multiple times by many different cultures? have you even read anything I have pointed out to you? can you answer the question about the Dalai lama?



yeah, actually there are quite a few variations

About the Dalai Lama.... http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by terrazoids

Uh, I never saww history repeat itself. Just one long line until... boom Judgement!!

are you incapable of answering my questions or just ignoring them?

Judgement? really? you've seen it?

[Sparrow]

Anyone know a good gambling site that'll take bets on how many people are gonna change their mind by the end of the thread?
I reckon I could clean up .

[terrazoids]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

are you incapable of answering my questions or just ignoring them?

Judgement? really? you've seen it?

Calm yourself... I'm getting to answer everyone. Have you seen the link? As for judgement, I haven't seen it yet... caus it isn't on us yet.

[terrazoids]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Anyone know a good gambling site that'll take bets on how many people are gonna change their mind by the end of the thread?
I reckon I could clean up .

How about changing there minds on the point of death. I bet I could clean up.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by terrazoids

As for judgement, I haven't seen it yet... caus it isn't on us yet.

Or...for the same reason nobody's verifiably seen a yeti yet. Because it's a myth.

[darknessangel]

Ok, ok... Letting all the infighting and dumb arguments aside. I think the main topic was about "atheist being a pain in the back of people".

It is my personal opinion that this has it's roots on people's ever lowering levels of tolerance to bullshit. Specially when it comes to kids. Religion was in ancient times like a club of good doers (leaving all the human sacrifices and genocides aside) and people working towards a single goal... just staying alive.

However, nowadays religion has become a serious obstacle for society as it will not evolve (think about methaphisical theories mumbo jumbo of trascendence, etc.). So now whe have establishments that clash against PROVEN knowledge. So the kids are getting mixed signals. Who should they believe? The local clergyman or the facts handed down by science? Should they feel "guilt" because of some arbitrary and outdated religious rule?

I think modern religion (with perhaps the exception of some buddhism) is a huge and horrendous speed bump in the evolution of human society. Very much like slavery and sexism. And because of this I think atheists and every human being has the right to say "NO TO BULLSHIT!".

Unless of course you don't like your science-developed computer, cell phone, internet and car.

[terrazoids]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I'm not sure I know what you think. I gather you're Christian, and probably Protestant because relatively few Catholics get into these kinds of debates; they're less prone to saying "read the book" as if that were a convincing argument.

You claimed that an understanding of a god was possible by reading a particular book. That part, I agree with. You implied that this understanding would include the concept of a "god of love." That part, I don't agree with. The more I've read of that book, the less love I see.

I would like to know which parts *of the book* convince you that this is a god of love, and how you decided to ignore the parts that mention his wrath, jealousy, hatred, and tendency to inflict armies and plagues on people who get in his way.

Eph. 2:11-16 all people whether Jews or Gentiles have to be saved by grace through faith. And when they are, they become one body with Jesus Christ the Cornerstone. There is no other salvation whatsoever. We become the Spiritual Israel of God. We are not the Israel after the flesh

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

are you incapable of answering my questions or just ignoring them?

Judgement? really? you've seen it?

To be fair, the thread's moving pretty fast, and terrazoids is pretty much defending the faith alone. S/he has to choose between short quippy answers to keep up, or longer answers and let the thread move on to a new subtopic (and be accused of ignoring people).

And, of course, *nobody* expects to actually be convinced of anything they didn't start out believing. At best, they're gathering data for future arguments with people who might be convinced of something.

I certainly don't expect to see anything from terrazoids that I haven't seen in several dozen online religious debates, and my own religious beliefs are pretty much impervious to standard proselytizing methods. I enjoy the back-and-forth, but it's not persuasive. I'm vaguely hoping to see something new, or an old argument presented in a new light, but not expecting it.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by terrazoids

Eph. 2:11-16 all people whether Jews or Gentiles have to be saved by grace through faith. And when they are, they become one body with Jesus Christ the Cornerstone. There is no other salvation whatsoever. We become the Spiritual Israel of God. We are not the Israel after the flesh

Where's the "god of love" part, as opposed to "worship me or be damned?"

[terrazoids]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Or...for the same reason nobody's verifiably seen a yeti yet. Because it's a myth.

Didn't you hear? Yeti's exist! They found one in a forest in India. Never discount a myth.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by terrazoids

About the Dalai Lama.... http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

like I said... don't link me to a website that exists to whip people into a frenzy. for an "internationally known award winning writer", I've never heard of him and can't find any of his awards.

I'm internationally known and award winning as well. so there!

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Or...for the same reason nobody's verifiably seen a yeti yet. Because it's a myth.

I can't figure out where he was going with that....

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

To be fair, the thread's moving pretty fast, and terrazoids is pretty much defending the faith alone. S/he has to choose between short quippy answers to keep up, or longer answers and let the thread move on to a new subtopic (and be accused of ignoring people).

And, of course, *nobody* expects to actually be convinced of anything they didn't start out believing. At best, they're gathering data for future arguments with people who might be convinced of something.

I certainly don't expect to see anything from terrazoids that I haven't seen in several dozen online religious debates, and my own religious beliefs are pretty much impervious to standard proselytizing methods. I enjoy the back-and-forth, but it's not persuasive. I'm vaguely hoping to see something new, or an old argument presented in a new light, but not expecting it.

I was just asking if some stuff had been read by the poster, should be a yes or no sort of answer, shouldn't require much skull sweat. *shrug*

[terrazoids]

Originally Posted by darknessangel

Ok, ok... Letting all the infighting and dumb arguments aside. I think the main topic was about "atheist being a pain in the back of people".

It is my personal opinion that this has it's roots on people's ever lowering levels of tolerance to bullshit. Specially when it comes to kids. Religion was in ancient times like a club of good doers (leaving all the human sacrifices and genocides aside) and people working towards a single goal... just staying alive.

However, nowadays religion has become a serious obstacle for society as it will not evolve (think about methaphisical theories mumbo jumbo of trascendence, etc.). So now whe have establishments that clash against PROVEN knowledge. So the kids are getting mixed signals. Who should they believe? The local clergyman or the facts handed down by science? Should they feel "guilt" because of some arbitrary and outdated religious rule?

I think modern religion (with perhaps the exception of some buddhism) is a huge and horrendous speed bump in the evolution of human society. Very much like slavery and sexism. And because of this I think atheists and every human being has the right to say "NO TO BULLSHIT!".

Unless of course you don't like your science-developed computer, cell phone, internet and car.

I agree with a lot of what you say. Bt there is no conflict between science and religion. They are not the subjects that interfere. And kids these days are getting mixed signals precisely because of the prevalence of atheism and the mistaken belief that you can create your own morality and wear it like some fashion statement.